What Is Historiography?

Introduction

Doctoral-level exegesis requires more than mastery of languages and sources; it demands a keen awareness of the historiography of interpretation—the study of how the story of biblical interpretation has been told and retold through time. To ask “What is historiography?” in the context of biblical studies is to enter into a meta-conversation: not just recounting what interpreters have said about Scripture, but examining how and why later scholars have narrated their contributions in particular ways.

Historiography is therefore a lens, a method, and a critical posture. It allows us to interrogate not only the past of interpretation but also the storytelling about that past, revealing that every “history of interpretation” is itself shaped by cultural assumptions, theological agendas, and philosophical presuppositions. In this lesson, we will explore the meaning of historiography, its role in Biblical Studies, its difference from history itself, its development across different epochs, its impact on exegetical method, and its continuing relevance for doctoral research.

Defining Historiography

Historiography vs. History

• History is the study of past events themselves. For example: the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE.

• Historiography is the study of how historians have written about those events. For example: how Eusebius in the fourth century portrayed Nicaea compared to how modern scholars frame it in light of political power or doctrinal development.

In Biblical Studies, history may reconstruct the origins of Deuteronomy; historiography analyzes how Wellhausen’s Documentary Hypothesis, von Rad’s “theological history,” and Brevard Childs’ canonical approach narrate that origin differently.

The Purposes of Historiography

1. Critical Reflection: By examining past narratives, we unmask the assumptions that shaped them.

2. Contextualization: We see how cultural forces (e.g., Hellenism, the Enlightenment) shaped interpretation.

3. Continuity and Change: We trace patterns of inheritance and rupture in the history of interpretation.

4. Identity Formation: Historiography locates the doctoral researcher within an ongoing conversation, clarifying whether one is extending, critiquing, or revising prior traditions.

Early Forms of Historiography

Jewish and Christian Beginnings

Even in antiquity, interpreters were engaged in historiographical work.

• The Chronicler retells Israel’s history differently from Samuel–Kings, emphasizing cultic and priestly concerns—a historiographical choice reflecting postexilic theology.

• Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews narrates Israel’s story for a Greco-Roman audience, blending apologetic and cultural explanation.

• Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History constructs a narrative of Christian continuity, presenting heresies as deviations and orthodoxy as progress.

These works illustrate that “telling the story” of God’s people was never neutral—it was always shaped by theological and cultural contexts.

Modern Historiography in Biblical Studies

Enlightenment Narratives

The Enlightenment redefined historiography around rationalism, empiricism, and skepticism. Biblical interpretation was retold as a progress narrative: from “naïve” allegory to “scientific” historical criticism. This Enlightenment historiography marginalized patristic and medieval methods as superstitious or uncritical, while privileging philology, archaeology, and rational reconstruction.

Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries

• Wellhausen’s Documentary Hypothesis offered a historical-critical narrative of the Pentateuch’s composition, shaping biblical scholarship for a century.

• Form criticism (Gunkel) and redaction criticism (Bornkamm, Conzelmann) layered new historiographical perspectives: Scripture as evolving oral tradition, then as edited theological documents.

• Bultmann’s demythologization reframed biblical historiography around existential categories, privileging kerygma over history.

Each approach not only advanced a method but also rewrote the history of interpretation, casting prior eras in light of its own assumptions.

Postmodern Historiography

The late twentieth century disrupted the linear “progress” story. Scholars of reception history (e.g., Gadamer, Jauss, Auerbach) emphasized that every act of interpretation becomes part of the biblical text’s Wirkungsgeschichte (“history of effects”). Allegory, once dismissed, has been rehabilitated as a legitimate mode of meaning-making. Historiography itself became plural—multiple, overlapping narratives rather than a single authoritative story.

Why Historiography Matters for Exegesis

Unmasking Assumptions

Historiography exposes the presuppositions embedded in methods. For example:

• Historical criticism assumed human reason could reconstruct origins with neutrality.

• Literary criticism assumed meaning resides in the text’s form, not its sources.

• Canonical criticism assumed the final form of the text is theologically normative.

Doctoral students who recognize these assumptions can avoid uncritical adoption.

Guarding Against Presentism

Without historiography, students risk projecting modern questions onto ancient interpreters. For example, dismissing Origen as “irrational” misses how his Platonism shaped a coherent worldview in his time. Historiography allows us to evaluate premodern interpretation within its own logic.

Constructing Frameworks

Historiography enables doctoral researchers to construct personal exegetical frameworks that are historically informed. Rather than eclectic borrowing, students can make deliberate methodological choices, aware of both the strengths and limits of each tradition.

Case Study: The “Death” and “Return” of Allegory

Historiography demonstrates how allegory has been alternately vilified and reclaimed. Enlightenment scholars dismissed it as fanciful. Henri de Lubac, however, showed that medieval allegory operated within a coherent fourfold sense of Scripture (literal, allegorical, tropological, anagogical). Postmodern literary critics have further rehabilitated allegory as an imaginative engagement with texts. Recognizing these historiographical shifts prevents caricature and opens new interpretive possibilities.

Case Study: Historical-Critical Method

Historiography shows that the historical-critical method was not simply a neutral discovery of truth but the product of Enlightenment ideals. Its dominance created a narrative of “scientific progress” that marginalized premodern voices. Today, scholars such as Brevard Childs and canonical critics have challenged this narrative, showing that the historical-critical approach, while valuable, is one among many possible historiographical framings.

Biblical Reflections on Historiography

Scripture itself demonstrates historiographical consciousness.

• Luke 1:1–4 explicitly states that Luke has investigated sources and arranged them in orderly fashion, signaling historiographical method.

• Chronicles retells history with different emphases than Samuel–Kings, reflecting postexilic theological concerns.

• Hebrews 11 offers a theological historiography of faith, reinterpreting Israel’s story to highlight perseverance.

Thus, historiography is not merely academic; it is intrinsic to the Bible itself.

Assignments

1. Historiographical Essay (3,000 words): Trace how one interpretive method (e.g., allegory, form criticism, liberation hermeneutics) has been narrated across different historiographical accounts. Compare Enlightenment portrayals with postmodern reassessments.

2. Exegetical Application (2,500 words): Choose a biblical text (e.g., Genesis 1, Isaiah 53, Romans 9) and research how it was interpreted across at least three historical periods. Write an essay showing how historiography clarifies the shifting emphases and assumptions behind those interpretations.

3. Personal Framework Reflection (2,000 words): Write a reflective essay on how historiographical awareness shapes your own exegetical commitments. Which historiographical narratives have most influenced your method, and how will you position yourself in relation to them?

Conclusion

Historiography is the study of the stories we tell about interpretation. It reveals that biblical exegesis has never been neutral, but always embedded in philosophical, theological, and cultural frameworks. For doctoral students, historiography is indispensable: it unmasks assumptions, guards against anachronism, and equips scholars to build critical, historically informed frameworks for their own work. By recognizing that every “history of interpretation” is itself an interpretation, students are freed to approach Scripture with rigor, humility, and creativity—conscious that they, too, are contributing to the ongoing historiography of biblical exegesis.

References

Carr, D. M. (2021). The history of biblical interpretation: A reader. Fortress Press.

De Lubac, H. (2000). Medieval exegesis: The four senses of Scripture (Vol. 1). Eerdmans.

Grant, R. M., & Tracy, D. (1984). A short history of the interpretation of the Bible (2nd ed.). Fortress Press.

Jauss, H. R. (1982). Toward an aesthetic of reception (T. Bahti, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press.

McGrath, A. E. (2017). Christian theology: An introduction (6th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.

Oeming, M. (2006). Contemporary biblical hermeneutics: An introduction. Ashgate.

Pelikan, J. (1993). The Christian tradition: A history of the development of doctrine (Vol. 1). University of Chicago Press.

Soulen, R. K., & Soulen, R. N. (2011). Handbook of biblical criticism (4th ed.). Westminster John Knox.

Tov, E. (2012). Textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible (3rd ed.). Fortress Press.